That’s probably true in this case, but other games may have to factor in things like existing dialog in to this. If a fully voiced acted piece of dialog mentions a character’s gender or sexuality, then altering that dialog or making additions to it may be problematic.

Precisely, the government shouldn't be telling Nintendo whether or not to include depictions of homosexuality in their games. But, the people have a right to push Nintendo to do the right thing by including their orientation in a game that's about living ones life online.
But, where do you draw the line? One of the things that keeps minorities down is a restriction on the depictions in the mass media. Surely the government shouldn't be making mandates, but the consumers are completely the right group to demand equal treatment.

Now, if this were a game where you were playing somebody else, I think that would be different..
People say that, and it's BS. The reason why polygamy and polygyny are typically illegal is because it ensures that a portion of the population can't get married. The FLDS had to find reasons to excommunicate 2/3 of the males in order for there to be enough women for the men that remained to be married.

What's more, cultures that have polygamy don't always have rules that require the person marrying multiple people to be capable of supporting all of them.

Multiple marriage itself is something that has very real problems associated with it in the same way that marrying children off to adults has inherent problems.

Marriage in heart is one thing (always exists) and marriage in state (codified and bestowing benefits) is quite another.

It is not as much as the concept of marriage that is challenged, as anyone could always be bound as to their choosing, but as to the state bestowing benefits on one marriage vs another.

State does not belong in it, from either side.

Change codification so neither side benefits; remove marriage from tax liability, etc.

Fair is fair, see how many like it :-)

You've got me thinking about games with physically disabled protagonists now!
Apparently, there was a Dare Devil GBA game:
http://www.mobygames.com/game/gameboy-advance/daredevil
(he's blind and all)

And isn't the guy in Crysis supposed to be pretty injured with mobility problems without the suit on, or something?
ooh 'Game Theory' just got picked up by The Escapist, I really liked the new ep on there so I was checking out the pre-Escapist YouTube eps, this one is relevant, especially to this^ point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdmJXHJLZ6M&list=PL35FE5C4B157509C9

Sounds to me like we're rationing people... to people.
"Oh, you're an item now, are you? ONE ITEM PER HOUSEHOLD :|!"

In some cultures they don't even support the single one they can marry ;P.
Also - it's not like only a single party in a marriage must be responsible for the income...

I don't disagree, but is this enough to legally limit people in how they live their lives?

From a detached, logical standpoint, one might as well claim that childbearing isn't necessarily something everyone should be involved in, as it can do more harm than good to the society as a whole. In spite of this - we don't very much regulate human reproduction, leaving it up to the individuals. Where do you draw the line, and why does it happen to conveniently be around where our current cultural customs end ;)? Of course - I'm not saying it should be complete anarchy...

As a side note - perhaps we could use more media depiction of polygamy or more instances of it in games. If for nothing else - for flavor and variety...

Personally I'm actually slightly disappointed by the level of crazy to gawk at (for a general internet discussion, from the GOG forums remaining a nice, friendly place to hang out perspective I guess its more positive)

It seems that the Gender/Sarkesian threads get more off the rails and vitriolic than this - does this mean that the guys around here feel more threatened by women than gay people? Not sure what to read from THAT...

Thoughts about polygamy crossed my mind while I wrote my post, but I decided to not drive the argument into that direction since polygamy is a more complicated issue than homosexuality or race. Seeing that you already participated in this thread, I should have known that you would pick it up anyway (this is meant as a compliment btw ;) ).

Anyway, you already mentioned the core point (at least for me personally): "consensual". As long as everyone involved wants to live that way, I don't see a problem. (In practice, this kind of automatically limits the size of such groups, because the bigger they grow, the less likely it will be that everyone agrees to include another person into the relationship.)

A problem, though, is that polygamy as a cultural standard often comes along with extreme gender inequality (as in, only one gender is allowed to have multiple partners of the opposite sex), and also inequality within one gender (the privileged individuals of that gender might scoop up a lot of the "available" individuals of the opposite sex, leaving the less privileged with very low chances to find a partner). So, while I'm not against polygamy per se, I think it has implications that its proponents should be wary of.

But that's a complex issue that would probably fit better in it's own thread, I think. ;)

"Polygamy"
Shaw's best work IMO though I was never a real big fan of the musical.

Not a problem :)

I agree this is all about perspective. This is more a case of "hanlon's razor" : I don't think the game was intending to exclude anyone, but just trying to encompass the more mainstream behaviors (and so not spending time implementing and testing ""minor"" features).
For instance, here are some more or less far-fetched questions I have about the game :
- Is there a possibility to have a secret lover ?
- Can you be an 'outlaw' polygamist ?
- Can you sleep with your dog in the same bed ?
In a nutshell, is there a limit that devs HAVE TO reach but not overstep ?

In videogames there is a difference between things you cannot do because of morality (torture children, throw kittens at walls, ...) , and things you cannot do because of lacking features (having the exact same skin color as I have in real life). We are currently discussing the second case, and I think we can ask why the feature is missing, not being offended that the devs forbade us same sex marriage.

In all cases, the devs shouldn't do "minimal communication" on the issue, because that is a dismissive stance.

Edit : ninja'd on the polygamy. That's no surprise.

Video games are art and artists can implement whatever they want.
Gosh, the most absurd thing about this is, that these people actually want to force their social habits upon artists while claiming, that others force their social habits on them. This hypocrisy really blows my mind.
I never have seen a video game character that has my social habits, ehrmagerd, now I must nag around and sue someone! -.-*

It's like attacking Leonardo da Vinci, because there is no gay dude in the portrait of Mona Lisa, with the difference, that it's not even a good video game but just some crap.

While I think you make a point, since when is sexual preference a "habit"? You don't call having blond hair a habit or being right handed a habit.

Since there never could be made a genetic link to it, although it was claimed for decades without any proof.
Turned out to be wrong, it's a matter of social development, so the comparison is invalid, although many people dye their hair.

So you are strait because you were raised to be strait? You weren't born with any natural attraction to the opposite sex?

No, I don't argue with people like that. I just leave you behind and feel sorry for you. :D